Re: Bateman : Wed Sep 21, 2022 7:50 am  

NickyKiss wrote:

I think fans of the game as a whole are in a confused mess and it’s through no fault of their own. We see bans all season for ridiculous reasons and then when Welsby avoids one, for something bans have absolutely been given out for, we don’t know if we should be saying ‘well that’s a joke’ or ‘finally some common sense’. Make no bones about it, he’s banned if that tackle comes mid season. Now he shouldn’t be because that’s the game and we all know it’s a great tackle but the way in which the rules have been put in place this season means they’ve now backflipped because it’s a final. They’ve also only given Knowles 2 games and Bateman 3 because they have the World Cup to play in (although whoever decided club bans would carry through to the World Cup is a clown).

In summary it’s an absolute mess and needs sorting out for 2023. The game cannot afford to keep having people sat down for nothing incidents but by the same token, it cannot leave itself open to criticism when they move the goalposts because of how important upcoming games are.

Agree with the majority of this although not completely with the carry through of bans. To paraphrase Steve Mascord yesterday, you can't have an incident like Ben Flower on Hohaia and then have him play for Wales a couple of weeks later. That's not to say I think trivial Grade A/B charges should carry over aswell but where do you draw the line?

Re: Bateman : Wed Sep 21, 2022 9:05 am  

SFW wrote:

Agree with the majority of this although not completely with the carry through of bans. To paraphrase Steve Mascord yesterday, you can't have an incident like Ben Flower on Hohaia and then have him play for Wales a couple of weeks later. That's not to say I think trivial Grade A/B charges should carry over aswell but where do you draw the line?

That’s an extreme incident in fairness and there would need to be a line somewhere I guess. That Flower incident was borderline criminal and it would indeed feel wrong if he then run out in a World Cup. How often do incidents like that happen though? Not very seems to be the answer. He was banned in months rather than games thinking back. If we look at gradings now, isn’t the most serious a grade F? Maybe just those sit out all competitions but then is it fair that somebody runs a serious club ban down in an international comp? It’s all pretty tricky but other sports seem to cope. I’m not sure what the rules are in Union and that would be interesting.

Re: Bateman : Wed Sep 21, 2022 10:55 am  

NickyKiss wrote:

That’s an extreme incident in fairness and there would need to be a line somewhere I guess. That Flower incident was borderline criminal and it would indeed feel wrong if he then run out in a World Cup. How often do incidents like that happen though? Not very seems to be the answer. He was banned in months rather than games thinking back. If we look at gradings now, isn’t the most serious a grade F? Maybe just those sit out all competitions but then is it fair that somebody runs a serious club ban down in an international comp? It’s all pretty tricky but other sports seem to cope. I’m not sure what the rules are in Union and that would be interesting.

I'm pretty sure domestic bans in union are in weeks rather than games which can/does rule players out of internationals. That's not to they have it right either though,

I believe domestic bans in football aren't carried into internationals although surely they will for drugs etc? Did Suarez play for Uruguay after all the racial stuff with Evra? Can't think of any examples although I've hardly got an interest any more.

It would be a brave governing body that drew a line in the sand and allowed carry over for some suspensions and not others, all it would take is one player to take it further and it would get laughed out of court.

Re: Bateman : Wed Sep 21, 2022 8:16 pm  

Zig wrote:

Of course it is and why not? Do you honestly think that the Aussies wouldn’t do the same? The RFL
Seem to have changed the disciplinary rules lately as well, do you not think that Bateman’s three match ban and Knowles two match ban are lenient?

It`s ok Knowles now cleared to play after the appeal of the appeal has reduced his ban to zero.

Re: Bateman : Wed Sep 21, 2022 8:33 pm  

chapylad wrote:

It`s ok Knowles now cleared to play after the appeal of the appeal has reduced his ban to zero.

UNBELIEVABLE

Re: Bateman : Wed Sep 21, 2022 8:35 pm  

What an embarrassment. And the authorities of the sport wonder why nobody takes RL seriously in the media. Circus

Re: Bateman : Wed Sep 21, 2022 9:13 pm  

Good.

It's the GF, I want to see the best players on the pitch. Not on the sidelines. Bans are absolutely pointless anyway.

Re: Bateman : Thu Sep 22, 2022 12:44 am  

Absolutely not. If you say in advance, bans don't carry over to a GF, that's one thing. But if you don't, it's ridiculous he plays.

Re: Bateman : Thu Sep 22, 2022 5:58 am  

Like I said on another thread, "dont count your chicken wings". Joke of a decision from the highest level - the game is fast heading to part time / amateur status.

Re: Bateman : Thu Sep 22, 2022 7:34 am  

GrahamBray wrote:

Like I said on another thread, "dont count your chicken wings". Joke of a decision from the highest level - the game is fast heading to part time / amateur status.

The people who made this decision are part time/amateur. Simply not good enough.
Time that those responsible for bringing the game into disrepute are named and shamed.